PDA

View Full Version : Omar Khan



Chidi29
01-07-2013, 03:43 PM
Question I've been thinking about the past few days.

We know it came down to him and John Schneider for Seattle's GM job a couple years ago. Seemed like Khan was really close to moving on.

League has 5 GM spots open this offseason, practically an unheard of amount. I haven't heard Khan be offered to interview for a single one yet. What gives?

I love that he's still here and I know he got a new title, but it's surprising that no one else has called him up.

fansince'76
01-07-2013, 03:48 PM
Might be because the Steelers promoted him internally last summer: https://twitter.com/EdBouchette/status/228159576397189120

Chidi29
01-07-2013, 03:51 PM
Might be because the Steelers promoted him internally last summer: https://twitter.com/EdBouchette/status/228159576397189120

Yeah, I knew about the promotion/new title like I mentioned in the OP. And I'm sure it shows him that the organization thinks of him highly and probably came with a nice raise. But still, it's not a GM job. And you'd think that teams would at least request an interview and see if he's interested. The same way Arizona is offering Haley an interview even though he might not (probably won't?) take it.

fansince'76
01-07-2013, 03:54 PM
Yeah, I knew about the promotion/new title like I mentioned in the OP. And I'm sure it shows him that the organization thinks of him highly and probably came with a nice raise. But still, it's not a GM job. And you'd think that teams would at least request an interview and see if he's interested. The same way Arizona is offering Haley an interview even though he might not (probably won't?) take it.

If it pays the same as a GM job (and I'm assuming it does), I wouldn't really care about the title.

Chidi29
01-07-2013, 03:55 PM
It shouldn't pay the same as the GM and it doesn't come with the same role. Colbert is our GM.

fansince'76
01-07-2013, 04:03 PM
It shouldn't pay the same as the GM and it doesn't come with the same role. Colbert is our GM.

I realize that, but I'm not privy to the Steelers' front office salaries. Just guessing, that's all.

Psycho Ward 86
01-07-2013, 04:06 PM
speaking of schneider, he's doing a pretty good job for seattle.

Chidi29
01-07-2013, 04:08 PM
speaking of schneider, he's doing a pretty good job for seattle.

Definitely. Not positive what exactly his role is, who has final say, but they're hit in the draft and their out-of-the-box thinking has paid off.

Psycho Ward 86
01-07-2013, 04:17 PM
yeah im still having trouble believing that schneider, gus bradley, and pete carroll are making so many unorthodox methods work in seattle (absurdly big DB's, starting an overlooked short qb over a qb getting starter money, carroll's rah rah approach, the bandit package/strange defensive fronts), but kudos to them for getting it done. i remember in the offseason there was some poll about how voters on some website thought the seahawks defense would be better than ours. we all laughed, but they ended up with the best scoring defense in the nfl. gotta say the seahawks are making the nfl a lot more interesting

Chidi29
01-07-2013, 04:21 PM
Yeah, they've done an excellent job.

But back to my main point, I'm surprised that Khan hasn't gotten an interview. He definitely deserves one.

oneforthetoe
01-08-2013, 12:43 AM
KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNN! !!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, I just have to do that every time his name comes up. Please continue.

tube517
01-08-2013, 08:03 AM
KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNN! !!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, I just have to do that every time his name comes up. Please continue.

Beat me to it. :lol:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRnSnfiUI54

Mojouw
01-08-2013, 10:25 AM
I'm guessing Khan has not been asked for an interview based on two things. The first being that he is a "cap guy" more than a "personnel guy". With so many of the teams that fired GM's also lacking a head coach; they are likely waiting to asses the personnel/draft strengths of their top coaching candidates prior to pairing them with a GM. The increasing trend is that the big splashy coaching hires get to either serve as their own GM or hand-pick a guy to keep the spot warm for them. Personally, I think that is bass ackwards, but I don't get paid to run an NFL team. The second reason is that Khaaaaaaaan! has passed a couple of times, might be perceived as uninterested?

Chidi29
01-08-2013, 08:01 PM
I'm guessing Khan has not been asked for an interview based on two things. The first being that he is a "cap guy" more than a "personnel guy". With so many of the teams that fired GM's also lacking a head coach; they are likely waiting to asses the personnel/draft strengths of their top coaching candidates prior to pairing them with a GM. The increasing trend is that the big splashy coaching hires get to either serve as their own GM or hand-pick a guy to keep the spot warm for them. Personally, I think that is bass ackwards, but I don't get paid to run an NFL team. The second reason is that Khaaaaaaaan! has passed a couple of times, might be perceived as uninterested?

Maybe but I know the cap guys have become a lot more popular than they were in the past because of how business-oriented the league has begun. You can pair a "power-hungry" head coach who wants the final say with a business GM like Seattle tried to do with Carroll.

86WARD
01-11-2014, 09:56 AM
Will be nice if he goes to Miami...may be able to get someone in that can get this team out of cap hell...lol.

ALLD
01-11-2014, 11:46 AM
I would definitely take the job in Miami if it were offered to me. They have a great fan base and will do well once they put a consistent winner on the field. The ocean is also great.

fansince'76
01-11-2014, 11:51 AM
Will be nice if he goes to Miami...may be able to get someone in that can get this team out of cap hell...lol.

Or we could do worse...

Psycho Ward 86
01-11-2014, 12:52 PM
i thought omar khan doesnt have any say in who does and doesnt get signed? I thought he basically has to manage the cap as best as he can based on what tomlin and colbert want? someone correct me if thats wrong, i thought i heard people say that before

Chidi29
01-11-2014, 01:56 PM
i thought omar khan doesnt have any say in who does and doesnt get signed? I thought he basically has to manage the cap as best as he can based on what tomlin and colbert want? someone correct me if thats wrong, i thought i heard people say that before

Yeah, I'm guessing he doesn't have input in actually building the roster. He may work with Tomlin/Colbert to see what players could make sense financially but he won't build the roster. Like you said, rolls with what he is given.

tube517
01-11-2014, 05:40 PM
Khhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!!!!!!!!! :chuckle:

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using Tapatalk

Dwinsgames
01-11-2014, 07:27 PM
we do not hear much about his actual job duties other than working out the financial terms of contracts .... that being said I am not all that impressed , but again we do not know exactly what parameters he is working under either so to go much past what I already have said would be IMO unfair

Chidi29
01-11-2014, 07:55 PM
Steelers did hire his replacement last year so if Khan is gone, we have a Plan B.

Doesn't sound like he is a front runner for the job, though.

steelreserve
01-13-2014, 07:05 PM
Yeah, they've done an excellent job.

But back to my main point, I'm surprised that Khan hasn't gotten an interview. He definitely deserves one.


Would you hire the salary cap guy from a team whose salary cap is all screwed up? I wouldn't.

No offense, but if I was looking at salary cap/negotiator people for a GM role, I'd call up the guy from the Patriots or the 49ers, and Khan would be close to last on my list.

Chidi29
01-14-2014, 02:28 AM
Would you hire the salary cap guy from a team whose salary cap is all screwed up? I wouldn't.

No offense, but if I was looking at salary cap/negotiator people for a GM role, I'd call up the guy from the Patriots or the 49ers, and Khan would be close to last on my list.

I really wouldn't call it "all screwed up". We're not perfect but it isn't awful either.

Khan is widely respected as one of the best in the business. Remember he was a finalist for the Seattle GM job. Came down to him and Schnieder.

422420945622417408

steelreserve
01-14-2014, 08:17 AM
I really wouldn't call it "all screwed up". We're not perfect but it isn't awful either.

Khan is widely respected as one of the best in the business. Remember he was a finalist for the Seattle GM job. Came down to him and Schnieder.

422420945622417408

I'd have to respectfully disagree with both you and Ralph Cindrich. While he's gotten key players re-signed, we got stuck with crippling contracts, and in some cases we overpaid by basically negotiating against ourselves. The solution was to kick the can down the road and cross our fingers for a higher cap, which didn't happen. Over the past couple of years, we've been paying for that by watching other key players walk, which has negatively affected our performance on the field. While some say that's just the price we paid for keeping our Super Bowl teams together, a big part of the problem is that we overpaid also. That's pretty screwed up to me.

Chidi29
01-14-2014, 11:06 AM
I don't think that is all on Khan. He likely doesn't get to have total say in who gets signed. He works for Tomlin/Colbert. A lot of teams are tight against the cap and again, it isn't terrible.

A tweet from Wexell today.

423094964969422849

His guy also believes he knows personnel well enough to do well as a GM.

steelreserve
01-14-2014, 01:22 PM
I know the argument that Khan isn't the one with the final say in who we sign - but I still think, assuming we were going to sign the exact same guys, we still overpaid on certain contracts when we didn't have to (Woodley, Timmons). We also let the Max Starks situation turn into a very expensive blunder a few years ago, and also suffered through two more bad OL contracts with Kemoeatu and Colon. I just am not sure Khan is quite the numbers guru or cost-saving negotiator he is made out to be.

As for making a good GM: He knows personnel well enough to make a good GM ... but he's off the hook for our own current mistakes because he doesn't have full say over personnel ... well, which one is it? You can't get the credit but not the blame.

86WARD
01-14-2014, 02:38 PM
It's easy to be a "nice guy", a guy agents want to "work with" when you over pay for players...lol.

Chidi29
01-14-2014, 02:49 PM
I know the argument that Khan isn't the one with the final say in who we sign - but I still think, assuming we were going to sign the exact same guys, we still overpaid on certain contracts when we didn't have to (Woodley, Timmons). We also let the Max Starks situation turn into a very expensive blunder a few years ago, and also suffered through two more bad OL contracts with Kemoeatu and Colon. I just am not sure Khan is quite the numbers guru or cost-saving negotiator he is made out to be.

As for making a good GM: He knows personnel well enough to make a good GM ... but he's off the hook for our own current mistakes because he doesn't have full say over personnel ... well, which one is it? You can't get the credit but not the blame.

At the time, I don't think many people called Woodley's contract a bad one and I don't know of many today that would be critical of what Timmons got.

I don't claim to know the extent of what exactly his duties are outside of the salary cap but if Tomlin/Colbert want to keep a guy, it's Khan's job to try and make it work under the cap. And he has.

As for the second part, it's just going off of whoever Wexell's guy is. He apparently knows Khan better than I do. But just because Khan isn't in charge of something, like managing personnel, doesn't mean he can't do it. It's like Ricky Bobby. No one knew he could drive really fast until he did. Give Khan the chance to be in charge of those decisions and maybe he'll do a good job.

Dwinsgames
01-14-2014, 03:04 PM
At the time, I don't think many people called Woodley's contract a bad one and I don't know of many today that would be critical of what Timmons got.

I don't claim to know the extent of what exactly his duties are outside of the salary cap but if Tomlin/Colbert want to keep a guy, it's Khan's job to try and make it work under the cap. And he has.

As for the second part, it's just going off of whoever Wexell's guy is. He apparently knows Khan better than I do. But just because Khan isn't in charge of something, like managing personnel, doesn't mean he can't do it. It's like Ricky Bobby. No one knew he could drive really fast until he did. Give Khan the chance to be in charge of those decisions and maybe he'll do a good job.

that's just it ... we as fans really do not know what value Khan brings to the table as we are not privy to the inner workings of the organization ....

we do not know how adept he is at personnel , we do not know what input he has in terms to the $'s players will receive in their contracts or if he even has input on the numbers other than fitting them within the cap ....

what we do know is this , we have been in cap hell for many years ( some worse than others ) but never have enough money under the cap to sign anyone of any notoriety in FA period but again we do not know WHO is to blame for any of it ......

Khan is an unknown to outsiders of the league and I do not see that changing unless he is hired away

Chidi29
01-14-2014, 03:53 PM
Well he's good enough to keep getting looks to be a GM and everything from people who do know him have nothing but good things to say about him. That counts for something, no?

Dwinsgames
01-14-2014, 04:42 PM
Well he's good enough to keep getting looks to be a GM and everything from people who do know him have nothing but good things to say about him. That counts for something, no?

kind of my point without coming out and saying it ....

we do not know much about him from the outside looking in , but we see him getting looks so their must be some reason for it

Chidi29
01-14-2014, 04:51 PM
And assuming he is good at his job as the reason why he is getting looks is a logical one

Dwinsgames
01-14-2014, 05:02 PM
And assuming he is good at his job as the reason why he is getting looks is a logical one

or even decent at his job but with other skills that would enable him to take on a larger role with another organization that would enable him to use those skills that is being limited in using in his current role / job with the steelers

steelreserve
01-14-2014, 08:33 PM
At the time, I don't think many people called Woodley's contract a bad one and I don't know of many today that would be critical of what Timmons got.


Apparently most people live in a world where we have unlimited money and the salary cap is not a real thing, then. At the time, I kept saying that we'd be foolish to pay Woodley more than $4M-$5M a year, maybe $6M tops, and if he walked, we'd have to live with it. Timmons has performed well, but why pay him $10M when you could have been paying him $7M or $8M? We weren't bidding against anyone but ourselves on that one. $10M linebacker contracts are reserved for the best ones in the league at the peak of their careers. There was no reason for us to get roped into either of those deals like that.

Chidi29
01-14-2014, 08:51 PM
I wasn't a fan of signing Woodley to that kind of money either, but that isn't necessarily Khan's fault. If the team wanted to sign him, Khan was to find a way. And premier pass rushing linebackers weren't going to be cheap.

Dwinsgames
01-14-2014, 08:55 PM
Apparently most people live in a world where we have unlimited money and the salary cap is not a real thing, then. At the time, I kept saying that we'd be foolish to pay Woodley more than $4M-$5M a year, maybe $6M tops, and if he walked, we'd have to live with it. Timmons has performed well, but why pay him $10M when you could have been paying him $7M or $8M? We weren't bidding against anyone but ourselves on that one. $10M linebacker contracts are reserved for the best ones in the league at the peak of their careers. There was no reason for us to get roped into either of those deals like that.


again I have not seen anything that says Khan is responcible for the pure numbers , I believe he gets ( and by God I could be wrong here ) a set figure lets say 50 mill over 6 years and he has to finagle it so it fits under the cap the best way he can ...again I could be wrong as I am guessing but that is all any of us can do unless someone finds a published report defining his actual duties in a clear fashion

steelreserve
01-14-2014, 09:05 PM
I wasn't a fan of signing Woodley to that kind of money either, but that isn't necessarily Khan's fault. If the team wanted to sign him, Khan was to find a way. And premier pass rushing linebackers weren't going to be cheap.


again I have not seen anything that says Khan is responcible for the pure numbers , I believe he gets ( and by God I could be wrong here ) a set figure lets say 50 mill over 6 years and he has to finagle it so it fits under the cap the best way he can ...again I could be wrong as I am guessing but that is all any of us can do unless someone finds a published report defining his actual duties in a clear fashion


OK, so let me get this straight. He's the chief negotiator but he's not in charge of the amount or length of contracts. He's a great personnel guy, but he doesn't get any say in personnel. He's a salary cap wizard, but that's not his responsibility either; it's everyone else's fault that our cap situation is messed up.

Does the guy walk on water? To listen to everyone make excuses for him ... besides hanging out and being a great guy, I have a hard time understanding what he actually DOES do.

Dwinsgames
01-14-2014, 09:11 PM
OK, so let me get this straight. He's the chief negotiator but he's not in charge of the amount or length of contracts. He's a great personnel guy, but he doesn't get any say in personnel. He's a salary cap wizard, but that's not his responsibility either; it's everyone else's fault that our cap situation is messed up.

Does the guy walk on water? To listen to everyone make excuses for him ... besides hanging out and being a great guy, I have a hard time understanding what he actually DOES do.

look , I am not making excuses for him ....

all I am saying is unless you can tell me exactly what his job description entails and the amount of authority he holds in each area I am not willing to blame him blindly

steelreserve
01-15-2014, 09:53 AM
look , I am not making excuses for him ....

all I am saying is unless you can tell me exactly what his job description entails and the amount of authority he holds in each area I am not willing to blame him blindly


I don't know the answer to that either, but I'm not willing to blindly absolve him of blame either. We've had a rocky couple of years and some serious questions about the future, and probably everyone in the FO shares the blame for that to some extent. But I don't get how if everyone is on a downswing, or doing so-so at best, one guy suddenly gets to be a genius because we don't know his job description.

Dwinsgames
01-15-2014, 10:24 AM
I don't know the answer to that either, but I'm not willing to blindly absolve him of blame either. We've had a rocky couple of years and some serious questions about the future, and probably everyone in the FO shares the blame for that to some extent. But I don't get how if everyone is on a downswing, or doing so-so at best, one guy suddenly gets to be a genius because we don't know his job description.


I can't blame the second in command for what Custer decided to do at little big horn , what I am sure of is Colbert is the GM so he is the General of the Hired help ( so for me he is Custer )

Mojouw
01-15-2014, 10:38 AM
I don't know the answer to that either, but I'm not willing to blindly absolve him of blame either. We've had a rocky couple of years and some serious questions about the future, and probably everyone in the FO shares the blame for that to some extent. But I don't get how if everyone is on a downswing, or doing so-so at best, one guy suddenly gets to be a genius because we don't know his job description.

I think Khan has been doing better than other aspects of the FO. I simply don't buy the salary cap problems are insurmountable story. Cut Taylor and Clark, and there is a decent amount of room. Do almost anything with Woodley and problem is basically solved. That is the magic of non-guaranteed money. I realize that there will be some "dead money" on the books from the restructures for another season or so, but for a team that made a conscious decision to keep a SB veteran core together, things are not really that bad.

The evaluation and development of talent at key positions has been more of a concern. That has little or nothing to do with Khan.

For those that argue that the cap problems have limited depth (the oft cited example of having Guy Whimper as a back-up); please, specifically, point out the amazingly talented players that this team could/would have signed to sit on the bench if there would have been tons of cap dollars available.

I agree that there are problems and significant flaws with the Steelers right now, but, sorry, I do not buy the easy (and lazy) analysis that it is simply a function of the salary cap. They drafted two tackles high in the draft that don't cut it. They spent multiple picks on interior linemen - who are chronically beset by injuries. They have yet to field the same five man line with said high draft picks. Their two prized rookie skill position players were injured for large portions of this last season. They drafted a TE that was supposed to be able to catch and they would teach him to block. Paulson currently excels at neither of these skills. Curtis Brown was drafted to be a nickel back at worst and a 2nd corner ideally -- he is now an above average special teams player. They have attempted to fill the second ILB spot with draft picks. Again, injury derailed that plan.

Picture this team with some of these things going the Steelers way. Adams is indeed a 1st round LT that falls due marijuana concerns. He comes to the NFL and establishes himself as an above average at worst LT. Gilbert settles in as a physical RT. Decastro becomes a Pro Bowl guard. Pouncey stays healthy and continues the excellence of his rookie year. Embernaste (sp??) doesn't injure his knee and settles in as the physical spark-plug of the unit. Beachum is the swing tackle and first guy off the bench. Foster is the primary back-up along the interior. That makes the line solid and no cap issues. By the time most of those young guys need big dollar extensions the cap is cleaned up from the big contracts of the previous core.

Do the same with the LB corps. Jones is everything a 1st round OLB should be and terrorizes offenses. Worilds settles in as a legit double-digit pass-rusher. Timmons continues his excellent play and is flanked by a play-making non-injured Sean Spence. At this point, take or leave Woodley's contract.

I think everyone can see where I am going here. The holes on the roster are, in my opinion, more due to guys not playing up to their projections, injury problems, and slow development of young players rather than being hamstrung by the cap.

This off-season should prove fascinating. For the first time in a couple of seasons there are actually URFA at positions of "need" for the Steelers. They are over the cap. It will be interesting to see if they choose to only take a scalpel to the roster or a chainsaw.

To sum up, the point is I fail to see what Khan did wrong. If anything he deserves the high esteem those around the NFL seem to hold him to. He was, by all publicly available information, given the marching orders of keeping a team together that was comprised over around a half doze or so "max contract" guys. He did that, and if the folks in charged of identifying and developing talent had a better success rate, this team would likely be on another deep playoff run.

Dwinsgames
01-15-2014, 10:55 AM
I think Khan has been doing better than other aspects of the FO. I simply don't buy the salary cap problems are insurmountable story. Cut Taylor and Clark, and there is a decent amount of room. Do almost anything with Woodley and problem is basically solved. That is the magic of non-guaranteed money. I realize that there will be some "dead money" on the books from the restructures for another season or so, but for a team that made a conscious decision to keep a SB veteran core together, things are not really that bad.

The evaluation and development of talent at key positions has been more of a concern. That has little or nothing to do with Khan.

For those that argue that the cap problems have limited depth (the oft cited example of having Guy Whimper as a back-up); please, specifically, point out the amazingly talented players that this team could/would have signed to sit on the bench if there would have been tons of cap dollars available.

I agree that there are problems and significant flaws with the Steelers right now, but, sorry, I do not buy the easy (and lazy) analysis that it is simply a function of the salary cap. They drafted two tackles high in the draft that don't cut it. They spent multiple picks on interior linemen - who are chronically beset by injuries. They have yet to field the same five man line with said high draft picks. Their two prized rookie skill position players were injured for large portions of this last season. They drafted a TE that was supposed to be able to catch and they would teach him to block. Paulson currently excels at neither of these skills. Curtis Brown was drafted to be a nickel back at worst and a 2nd corner ideally -- he is now an above average special teams player. They have attempted to fill the second ILB spot with draft picks. Again, injury derailed that plan.

Picture this team with some of these things going the Steelers way. Adams is indeed a 1st round LT that falls due marijuana concerns. He comes to the NFL and establishes himself as an above average at worst LT. Gilbert settles in as a physical RT. Decastro becomes a Pro Bowl guard. Pouncey stays healthy and continues the excellence of his rookie year. Embernaste (sp??) doesn't injure his knee and settles in as the physical spark-plug of the unit. Beachum is the swing tackle and first guy off the bench. Foster is the primary back-up along the interior. That makes the line solid and no cap issues. By the time most of those young guys need big dollar extensions the cap is cleaned up from the big contracts of the previous core.

Do the same with the LB corps. Jones is everything a 1st round OLB should be and terrorizes offenses. Worilds settles in as a legit double-digit pass-rusher. Timmons continues his excellent play and is flanked by a play-making non-injured Sean Spence. At this point, take or leave Woodley's contract.

I think everyone can see where I am going here. The holes on the roster are, in my opinion, more due to guys not playing up to their projections, injury problems, and slow development of young players rather than being hamstrung by the cap.

This off-season should prove fascinating. For the first time in a couple of seasons there are actually URFA at positions of "need" for the Steelers. They are over the cap. It will be interesting to see if they choose to only take a scalpel to the roster or a chainsaw.

To sum up, the point is I fail to see what Khan did wrong. If anything he deserves the high esteem those around the NFL seem to hold him to. He was, by all publicly available information, given the marching orders of keeping a team together that was comprised over around a half doze or so "max contract" guys. He did that, and if the folks in charged of identifying and developing talent had a better success rate, this team would likely be on another deep playoff run.

good post and laying blame at the feet of where the blame belongs , the scouting department and its Boss Kevin Colbert

something that several of us from our old board are on record for over the past several years ....

bringing up and old saying ... some people are ahead of the curve , and others just follow the curve

Mojouw
01-15-2014, 11:24 AM
good post and laying blame at the feet of where the blame belongs , the scouting department and its Boss Kevin Colbert

something that several of us from our old board are on record for over the past several years ....

bringing up and old saying ... some people are ahead of the curve , and others just follow the curve

Thanks. I know this has been a sore point with you for years!

I think my emerging problem with the Steelers plan for the last handful of years is that they left themselves no margin for error. Obviously I am a Khan "defender", I have recently come out in defense of Haley and I seem to remember not hating Arians before that. And on this or other boards, I have risen to Colbert's defense. So either I am a rampant homer, which I choose not to believe, or there is something else going on. I've been thinking about what that could be recently and here is my theory.

1. Colbert "misses" on no more or no less of his draft picks than other well regarded GM's. Let's just assume this is true. I feel it is, but don't want to start a detailed debate.

2. Khan was given orders to keep they veteran guys together as long as possible, no matter what. He was successful at manipulating the cap for a long time in order to do that.

3. The Steelers badly miscalculated the impact of the latest CBA on the cap. If the cap continued the steady upward trend each season that it had exhibited in the prior CBA, none of this is ever even being talked about.

4. All of the restructures, resignings, free agency, etc was done with the knowledge that they would be tight against the cap. I refuse to believe that this level of strategy did not require input and at least tacit agreement from ownership, player personnel, the "cap-ology" side of the FO, and members of the coaching staff. That means Colbert knew he would have to feed players into the system to allow the team to re-tool on the fly. The old, "re-load rather than re-build" concept. This was the mistake.

What I am getting at is that they left themselves zero wiggle room. Draft "errors" tend to cascade. For instance, swing and miss on a WR in a draft. No cap money to fill the "unexpected" roster hole with a FA. So next year, you have to take ANOTHER WR; maybe two to be sure. Now 3 draft picks have been spent in an attempt to shore up one roster spot. That is an "opportunity cost" (to badly borrow a concept!) of 2 other positions/roster spots due to one "failed" pick. I have to figure that teams must attempt to loosely game-plan a multi-year draft strategy -- if not they are foolish and wasting a ton of good information/analysis. So that means if Year 1 called for drafting a WR and Year 2 called for drafting a tackle, and Year 3 called for a LB and you miss on the Year 1 wide-out...what then? Do you skip tackle and not have a young (CHEAP) player on the roster to replace the high priced vet (remember the conscious decision to "cap out") or do you then push out your plan and try to wall-paper over the problem another season (which is how I believe we got the last ride of Max Starks)?

I think my frustration with this team is that they put themselves in a ridiculous position. They had to "hit" on almost every draft pick for multiple seasons in a row to not have a couple of years of deficient talent. No scouting department, draft guru, etc is that good. I am starting to think that Colbert was put in an impossible situation. But, who knows, I may be simply damning the FO with faint praise! I just know that almost every fan-base thinks their team sucks at drafting!

But then again 3 shots at a Lombardi in like 5 seasons? Pretty good roll of the dice...

Dwinsgames
01-15-2014, 11:55 AM
Thanks. I know this has been a sore point with you for years!

I think my emerging problem with the Steelers plan for the last handful of years is that they left themselves no margin for error. Obviously I am a Khan "defender", I have recently come out in defense of Haley and I seem to remember not hating Arians before that. And on this or other boards, I have risen to Colbert's defense. So either I am a rampant homer, which I choose not to believe, or there is something else going on. I've been thinking about what that could be recently and here is my theory.

1. Colbert "misses" on no more or no less of his draft picks than other well regarded GM's. Let's just assume this is true. I feel it is, but don't want to start a detailed debate.

2. Khan was given orders to keep they veteran guys together as long as possible, no matter what. He was successful at manipulating the cap for a long time in order to do that.

3. The Steelers badly miscalculated the impact of the latest CBA on the cap. If the cap continued the steady upward trend each season that it had exhibited in the prior CBA, none of this is ever even being talked about.

4. All of the restructures, resignings, free agency, etc was done with the knowledge that they would be tight against the cap. I refuse to believe that this level of strategy did not require input and at least tacit agreement from ownership, player personnel, the "cap-ology" side of the FO, and members of the coaching staff. That means Colbert knew he would have to feed players into the system to allow the team to re-tool on the fly. The old, "re-load rather than re-build" concept. This was the mistake.

What I am getting at is that they left themselves zero wiggle room. Draft "errors" tend to cascade. For instance, swing and miss on a WR in a draft. No cap money to fill the "unexpected" roster hole with a FA. So next year, you have to take ANOTHER WR; maybe two to be sure. Now 3 draft picks have been spent in an attempt to shore up one roster spot. That is an "opportunity cost" (to badly borrow a concept!) of 2 other positions/roster spots due to one "failed" pick. I have to figure that teams must attempt to loosely game-plan a multi-year draft strategy -- if not they are foolish and wasting a ton of good information/analysis. So that means if Year 1 called for drafting a WR and Year 2 called for drafting a tackle, and Year 3 called for a LB and you miss on the Year 1 wide-out...what then? Do you skip tackle and not have a young (CHEAP) player on the roster to replace the high priced vet (remember the conscious decision to "cap out") or do you then push out your plan and try to wall-paper over the problem another season (which is how I believe we got the last ride of Max Starks)?

I think my frustration with this team is that they put themselves in a ridiculous position. They had to "hit" on almost every draft pick for multiple seasons in a row to not have a couple of years of deficient talent. No scouting department, draft guru, etc is that good. I am starting to think that Colbert was put in an impossible situation. But, who knows, I may be simply damning the FO with faint praise! I just know that almost every fan-base thinks their team sucks at drafting!

But then again 3 shots at a Lombardi in like 5 seasons? Pretty good roll of the dice...


Colbert may not miss or hit at any significant difference in level of anyone else ( I will agree to that so we do not have to do the math regardless of its accuracy ) but my issue is recognizing talent from production at the college level and I think he often times fails miserably in that department .... is that his fault or his scouts I am not really sure but at the end of the day it is his fault because he hired the scouts ....

when guys like me can look at the draft 10 min after its complete and redraft on paper a far more successful draft there is a problem ( we have done this experiment before and proved its effectiveness ) so not a hindsight approach because none of the players ever played a down in the NFL at that point or even sniffed the playbook for that matter .....

a novice should NEVER be able to do something like that and out GM the GM of an NFL team but for whatever reason it has been done successfully several times so its not a fluke because it was reproduced ....

Colbert most times is done drafting at the end of round 4 and the picks he makes takes a dramatic change in approach / methodology , sure he hits one now and again but even a blind squirrel finds the occasional nut .....

as for methods of drafting approach is everything in my opinion and we have seen this team go from drafting towards the future ( and often times why a rookie sees very little play time ) to drafting for need and forcing guys to play before they are ready .... the approach needs to swing back ....


I would like to see them take BPA combined with pos of need , draft guys a year before they are needed to play but allow them to compete as a rookie if they win the job they win the job , if they earned the reps give them the reps ..it is going to take time to get to that point because we are devoid of talent in some areas at this point due to poor drafting and poor development ...

there is no " easy answer " at this point

steelreserve
01-15-2014, 09:43 PM
I think Khan has been doing better than other aspects of the FO. I simply don't buy the salary cap problems are insurmountable story. Cut Taylor and Clark, and there is a decent amount of room. Do almost anything with Woodley and problem is basically solved. That is the magic of non-guaranteed money. I realize that there will be some "dead money" on the books from the restructures for another season or so, but for a team that made a conscious decision to keep a SB veteran core together, things are not really that bad.

The evaluation and development of talent at key positions has been more of a concern. That has little or nothing to do with Khan.

For those that argue that the cap problems have limited depth (the oft cited example of having Guy Whimper as a back-up); please, specifically, point out the amazingly talented players that this team could/would have signed to sit on the bench if there would have been tons of cap dollars available.

I agree that there are problems and significant flaws with the Steelers right now, but, sorry, I do not buy the easy (and lazy) analysis that it is simply a function of the salary cap. They drafted two tackles high in the draft that don't cut it. They spent multiple picks on interior linemen - who are chronically beset by injuries. They have yet to field the same five man line with said high draft picks. Their two prized rookie skill position players were injured for large portions of this last season. They drafted a TE that was supposed to be able to catch and they would teach him to block. Paulson currently excels at neither of these skills. Curtis Brown was drafted to be a nickel back at worst and a 2nd corner ideally -- he is now an above average special teams player. They have attempted to fill the second ILB spot with draft picks. Again, injury derailed that plan.

Picture this team with some of these things going the Steelers way. Adams is indeed a 1st round LT that falls due marijuana concerns. He comes to the NFL and establishes himself as an above average at worst LT. Gilbert settles in as a physical RT. Decastro becomes a Pro Bowl guard. Pouncey stays healthy and continues the excellence of his rookie year. Embernaste (sp??) doesn't injure his knee and settles in as the physical spark-plug of the unit. Beachum is the swing tackle and first guy off the bench. Foster is the primary back-up along the interior. That makes the line solid and no cap issues. By the time most of those young guys need big dollar extensions the cap is cleaned up from the big contracts of the previous core.

Do the same with the LB corps. Jones is everything a 1st round OLB should be and terrorizes offenses. Worilds settles in as a legit double-digit pass-rusher. Timmons continues his excellent play and is flanked by a play-making non-injured Sean Spence. At this point, take or leave Woodley's contract.

I think everyone can see where I am going here. The holes on the roster are, in my opinion, more due to guys not playing up to their projections, injury problems, and slow development of young players rather than being hamstrung by the cap.

This off-season should prove fascinating. For the first time in a couple of seasons there are actually URFA at positions of "need" for the Steelers. They are over the cap. It will be interesting to see if they choose to only take a scalpel to the roster or a chainsaw.

To sum up, the point is I fail to see what Khan did wrong. If anything he deserves the high esteem those around the NFL seem to hold him to. He was, by all publicly available information, given the marching orders of keeping a team together that was comprised over around a half doze or so "max contract" guys. He did that, and if the folks in charged of identifying and developing talent had a better success rate, this team would likely be on another deep playoff run.


I'm just going to say he probably has a small dick and that's the end of it.